It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Quote from source:
WHY do distant galaxies seem to age at the same rate as those closer to us when big bang theory predicts that time should appear to slow down at greater distances from Earth? No one can yet answer this new question, but one controversial idea is that the galaxies' light is being bent by intervening black holes that formed shortly after the big bang.
Space has been expanding since the big bang, stretching light from distant objects to longer, redder wavelengths - a process called "red shift". The expansion means that distant events appear to occur more slowly than those nearby. For example, the interval between light pulses leaving a faraway object once per second should have lengthened by the time they reach Earth because space has expanded during their trip.
Supernovae show this "time dilation" in the speed at which they fade - far-off explosions seem to dim more slowly than those nearby. But when Mike Hawkins of the Royal Observatory in Edinburgh, UK, looked at light from quasars he found no time dilation (Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, in press).
Quasars are galaxies so bright they can be seen across most of the universe. Using observations of nearly 900 quasars made over periods of up to 28 years, Hawkins compared patterns in the light between quasars about 6 billion light years from us with those at 10 billion light years away.
Originally posted by boaby_phet
i believe light can be bent
in all fairness we have no real way of testing if its true or not wether light can speed up or slow down over a distance.
Another method is to use the aberration of light, discovered and explained by James Bradley in the 18th century. This effect results from the vector addition of the velocity of light arriving from a distant source (such as a star) and the velocity of its observer. A moving observer thus sees the light coming from a slightly different direction and consequently sees the source at a position shifted from its original position. Since the direction of the Earth's velocity changes continuously as the Earth orbits the Sun, this effect causes the apparent position of stars to move around. From the angular difference in the position of stars, it is possible to express the speed of light in terms of the Earth's velocity around the Sun, which with the known length of a year can be easily converted in the time needed to travel from the Sun to Earth. In 1729, Bradley used this method to derive that light travelled 10,210 times faster than the Earth in its orbit (the modern figure is 10,066 times faster) or, equivalently, that it would take light 8 minutes 12 seconds to travel from the Sun to the Earth. Source
time is just the passing of existance! which is uniform wherever in the universe you most likely could ever go ... i know im being contridictary (as we have no way to proove this) but im yet to see any solid proof otherwise!
i also hate that the scientists take that the speed of light a constant speed measurement over light years when we have never even travelled a light year to test it!
i dont (know that light slows down when traveling through a dence matter), can you show me some scientific proof please?
The effect can be explained because (1) the speed of light is a constant (independent of how fast a light source is moving toward or away from an observer) and (2) the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, which causes light from distant objects to redshift (i.e. the wavelengths to become longer) in relation to how far away the objects are from observers on Earth. In other words, as space expands, the interval between light pulses also lengthens. Since expansion occurs throughout the universe, it seems that time dilation should be a property of the universe that holds true everywhere, regardless of the specific object or event being observed. However, a new study has found that this doesn’t seem to be the case - quasars, it seems, give off light pulses at the same rate no matter their distance from the Earth, without a hint of time dilation
One of Hawkins’ possible explanations for quasars’ lack of time dilation is that light from the quasars is being bent by black holes scattered throughout the universe. These black holes, which may have formed shortly after the big bang, would have a gravitational distortion that affects the time dilation of distant quasars. However, this idea of “gravitational microlensing” is a controversial suggestion, as it requires that there be enough black holes to account for all of the universe’s dark matter. As Hawkins explains, most physicists predict that dark matter consists of undiscovered subatomic particles rather than primordial black holes
There’s also a possibility that the explanation could be even more far-reaching, such as that the Universe is not expandingand that the big bang theory is wrong. Or, quasars may not be located at the distances indicated by their redshifts, although this suggestion has previously been discredited. Although these explanations are controversial, Hawkins plans to continue investigating the quasar mystery, and maybe solve a few other problems along the way.